• 13 Posts
  • 220 Comments
Joined 3 months ago
cake
Cake day: May 14th, 2026

help-circle



  • I think I’m going to put a declarations.md that says something like “I made this for me, but I’m sharing it with the world. If you find it useful, use it and let me know! If you find issues, submit request and I’ll look but no promises. And if you want feature X … fork it and build it. The code’s yours, with my blessings. PS: I don’t accept PRs, sorry”.

    I code for fun; I’m not looking for a third unpaid job. That’s what parenting is for.













  • Hah, I dont mean integrated like Micro$hit. I mean “is aware and can communicate with your other Proton services”.

    I like Lumo too but right now it’s just…a collection of open weight llms, with missing features, low context and poor utility (bad web app, poor integration with Proton drive, can’t create artifacts etc).

    If Proton’s intention is to create a privacy-based alternative to chat GPT or Claude, they’re going to be chewing off a hell of a lot more, and nothing in how Lumo is currently served offers any confidence in that.

    On the other hand, if their intention is to offer a Proton based product, that could be tightened up and made much more useful in a short order. Without spending a lot more.

    But I’m not doing Proton’s homework for them. As an end user, Lumo isn’t quite “there” for me as a product, so I will discontinue. YMMV.



  • Deepseek, Minimax, GLM, Kimi etc are all massive and take serious compute and storage. Active parameter count and MoE tricks not withstanding, does Proton have the capacity and infrastructure to offer them at scale (let’s say, 1 million subscribers) in good quality? Dunno.

    Unlike Kagi, Proton hosts in house, not API. Lumo lite is very plausibly Qwen 27B based on what Proton have stated and shared.

    It could be Qwen 3.6 35B-A3B or Qwen3.5-397B-A17B (but that makes no sense for a “lite”). Nothing else really matches the AAII scores they have stated.

    https://proton.me/support/lumo-privacy

    https://proton.me/blog/lumo-2

    So, if the intention is to provide a proton product, a bigger LLM is going to cost them a lot more to operate, concurrency, MoE tricks and network effects notwithstanding.

    Lumo is already capped at --ctx 128K at an unknown quant.

    Proton is vary cagey about the details, for reasons you can imagine.

    I think this could cause major problems for privacy guarantees.

    Why? Either the privacy protections are legitimate and effective - in which case, a smaller, more capable product becomes a genuine USP.

    It would costs less to run, costs less to buy, and is genuinely more useful than a bare LLM (or whatever thin harness or system prompt Proton uses

    Else the entire Proton premise is a house of cards from the jump.

    Either it’s all private or none of it is.



  • Cute.

    I’m unaware of any broad PII leaks or privacy issues specifically pertaining to Proton.

    If there are some, please cite them. I have no fealty to Proton or anyone else.

    Irrespective, my comment was meant as a foot in door / bridge, as most people (when encountering a privacy-based services) begin with Proton.

    Certainly, if you are concerned about them becoming a mini-Google (convergence of services wise), that’s fair, but at present, I’m unaware of any specific data breaches etc.

    If there’s a broader pattern of data insecurity, that’s worth discussing as well.

    Lumo is supposedly cryptogenically end to end encrypted on top of Lumo hosting the infrastructure in GDPR friendly locale, with zero data retention (ZDR) policies.

    The unique selling point of Lumo should be that it uses open weight models (GLM 5.2, Qwen 3.5 27b) with strong privacy policies. You could see why that might be an appealing competitor to something like chat GPT or Claude.

    In practice, it’s hamstrung and poorly integrated and it feels to be about one to two years behind the big providers.

    Given Proton’s infrastructure and ecosystems, I think they are probably bringing a knife to a gunfight if they go that route.




  • I am simpatico with her position.

    For what it’s worth, self-hosting doesn’t mean you need to be able to reach all your services off-site.

    LAN only access is perfectly valid and something that I prefer myself.

    Case in point -

    Last year I went to Japan for 5 weeks and rather than opening up dodgy ports to my home media services, I ended up taking a 128GB USB stick, my Chromecast and installing Nova Player.

    https://github.com/nova-video-player/aos-AVP

    Nova Player populates on device from your attached storage to create essentially a jellyfin like front-end. Install it, plug the chrome cast or whatever into HDMI on any TV and you’re off to the races.

    It’s wonderful and it’s actually now my primary streaming media source in the house; I just plug in my hard drive to my router, Nova sees it and my media sources are cross-populated to all of my Android devices.